پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,230 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,757 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,112,489 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 89,875,315 |
بررسی و تبیین انواع نوآوری در طراحی محصولات و جایگاه طراحی صنعتی در روند نوآوری | ||
| نشریه هنرهای زیبا: هنرهای تجسمی | ||
| مقاله 10، دوره 21، شماره 4، دی 1395، صفحه 95-106 اصل مقاله (1.8 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jfava.2016.59959 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| فرهاد آل علی* 1؛ احسان آرمان2 | ||
| 1عضو هیئت علمی گروه طراحی صنعتی، دانشکده هنر، دانشگاه سمنان | ||
| 2عضو هیئت علمی گروه صنایع دستی، دانشکده هنر، دانشگاه سمنان | ||
| چکیده | ||
| این مقاله مطالعهای است در رابطه با انواع نوآوری، چگونگی طبقهبندی آنها در روند طراحی و جایگاه و نقش طراحی صنعتی در این روند. در این راستا هرم نوآوری که در آن چهار نوع متفاوت از نوآوریمنتج از طراحی محصول قرار دارد، معرفی میگردد. این هرم نتیجه نهایی یک فرآیند تحقیقاتی است که با سه فضای مهم و کلیدی مرتبط با توسعه و تولید محصول جدید، سروکار دارد: فضای تجاری، مهندسی و طراحی. در اولین قدم این تحقیق، مبادرت به تعیین این مسئله شد که چگونه میتوان نقش طراحی در ایجاد نوآوری در محصول را بهتر نشان داد. برای پاسخ به این سؤال، یک روش وابسته به پدیدارشناسی مورد استفاده قرار گرفت، بطوریکه نوآوری در یک محصول در قالب یک پدیده مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. از این روش سه اهرم کارآمد از فرآیند نوآوری منتج از طراحی بدست میآید: فرم، طرز استفاده و فناوری. بعلاوه چهار نوع نتیجه عملی نیز از فرآیند نوآوری منتج از طراحی حاصل میگردد که از این قرارند: نوآوری در زیباییشناسی، نوآوری در طرز استفاده، نوآوری در مفهوم و نهایتاً نوآوری در ویژگیهای سمبولیک. نتایج و اهرمهای بدست آمده در این تحقیق به شکل هرم نوآوری ارائه میگردد که به آشکار ساختن تفاوتها و شباهتهای آنها کمک میکند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| طراحی محصول؛ روند نوآوری؛ طراحی صنعتی؛ تولید محصول | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| An Investigation of Different Kinds of Innovation in Product Design and the Station Point of Industrial Design in Innovation Process | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Farhad AleAli1؛ Ehsan Arman2 | ||
| 1Faculty Member of Industrial Design, Faculty of Art, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran. | ||
| 2Faculty Member of Handi Craft, Faculty of Art, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| This paper is a study in different kinds of innovations in the product-design field and the way of categorization of them and station point of industrial design in this process. The research process comprised the following five steps: 1. Defining the research problem and establishing its methodology; 2.Selecting and describing samples; 3. Analyzing data and shaping hypotheses; 4. Testing the categorization and refining it; 5. Final testing and enfolding results with existing literature. The first step of the research project attempted to determine how to better demonstrate the contribution, design makes to product innovation. In order to answer this, a phenomenological approach was used, i.e. observing product innovation as a phenomenon. From this approach, three possible levers of a design-driven innovation process emerged: form, mode of use, and technology. This overall research process fits with the humanities tradition. This process first saw the gathering of “evidence produced by research” and then the gathering of “the judgments of other scholars” on the emerging research issues. On these “primary” and “secondary” sources of information, a logical argument was conducted by adding personal judgments in order to arrive at the final formulation of results. A detailed description of each step in the research process follows. During the third step of this research, which was devoted to shaping hypotheses, one issue that emerged was whether to consider design-driven innovation a process. Discussion on the first ten examples had clearly shown the need to distinguish between the results obtained by the designer and the tools he or she used to reach it. Therefore, the research group decided to assume the following definition of innovation, which is now widely accepted and underlines its procedural nature: “innovation equals creativity plus a successful implementation processing”. Through our phenomenological analysis, four possible results were distinguished: •Aesthetic Innovation •Innovation of Use •Meaning Innovation •Typological Innovation. In the dialectics between function,” the use the object is intended for,” and form” the external configuration of an object resulting from shape, proportion and color,” dialectics that have long characterized the history of industrial design, aesthetic innovation concerns form while innovation of use concerns the function. Conversely, no such clear-cut distinction between meaning innovation and typological innovation can be drawn. The levers and results are systematized here into an innovation pyramid, which helps to clarify both their similarities and their differences. Is such a categorization for product innovation, as set forth here, really true to life? And, by proposing it, are we not likely to constrain the results of creative activity into too rigid a model? As such, identifying the three levers and the four results for the design-driven innovation process mandates forgoing certain differences and obliging certain resemblances. Consequently an innovation pyramid has introduced which presents four different kind of design- driven innovations. This pyramid is the final result of our research process involving the three key disciplinary areas related to new product development: management, engineering and design. Nevertheless, the proposed categorization has enabled the author of this article to clearly explain the design-driven innovation phenomenon to students. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Product Design, Innovations Process, Industrial design, Product Manufacturing | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Abernathy, W. J & Utterback, J. M (1978), Patterns of innovation in industry. Technology Review, 80(7), 40-47.
Anselmi, L (2004), the Use quality of household appliances, In L. Rampino (Ed.), Polidesign, Milano.
Baglieri, E (2003), from Idea to value, Etas Libri, Milano.
Bertola, P (2004), Design in the scientific thought: Towards a phenomenology of design, (pp.23-38), Polidesign, Milano.
Buchanan, R (1985), Declaration by design: Rhetoric, argument, and demonstration in design practice, Design Issues, 2(1), 4-22.
Bürdek, B. E (2005), Design: History, theory and practice of product design, Birkhauser, Boston.
Dell′Era, C & Verganti, R (2007), Strategies of innovation and imitation of product languages, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24(6), 580-599.
Eisenman, M (2007), Aesthetic innovation: Changing institutional logics in standardized high-technology industries, Technology, Innovation and Institutions Working Paper Series, Alberta, Technology Commercialization Centre at University of Alberta, Canada.
Fredrickson, B. L (1998), What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 300-319.
Gemser, G & Leenders, M. A. A. M (2001), How integrating industrial design in the product development process impacts on company performance, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(1), 28-38.
Gemser, G & Wijnberg, N. M (2002), the Economic significance of industrial design awards: A conceptual framework, Design Management Journal, 2(1), 61-71.
Griffith, S. J & Skibsted, J. M (2009), In pursuit of the design icon, In A. Wiliams, R. Partington, & Q. Sun (Eds.), Proceedings of the Tsinghua International Design Management Symposium (pp. 150-159), Salford, Adelphi Research Institute, UK.
Henderson, R. M & Clark, K. B (1990), Architectural innovation: The configuration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 9-30.
Heskett, J (2002), Design: A very short introduction, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Kotelnikov, V (n.d.), Systemic innovation: The new holistic approach for the new knowledge-driven economy, RetrievedFebruary 17, 2011, from http://www.1000ventures.com.
Krippendorff, K (1989), on the Essential contexts of artifacts or on the proposition that design is making sense (of things), Design Issues, 5(2), 9-39.
Krippendorff, K (2006), the Semantic turn a new foundation for design, FL: CRC/Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton.
Kubler, G (1972), the Shape of time, Yale University Press, New Haven.
Maldonado, T (1991), Industrial design: A re-examination, Feltrinelli, Milano.
Norman, D (2004), Emotional design, Apogeo, Milano.
Papanek, V (1983), Design for human scale, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Pinar, F, William (2004), What Is Curriculum Theory?, Lawrence erlbaum Associates, Publishers, London.
Ravasi, D & Lojacono, G (2005), Managing design and designers for strategic renewal, International Journal of Strategic Management, 38(1), 51-77.
Red Dot Award citation (2008), Retrieved June 24, 2009, from http://en.red-dot.org.
Von Stamm, B (2003), Managing innovation, design and creativity, John Wiley & Sons, London.
Rindova, V. P & Petkova, A. P (2007), When is a new thing a good thing?, Organization Science, 18(2), 217-232.
Ulrich, K. T & Eppinger, S. D (2003), Product design and development (3rd Ed.), McGraw-Hill, Boston.
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,984 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 5,674 |
||